In health prevention and promotion, and in public health in general, "evaluation fundamentally consists of making a value judgment about an intervention by implementing a system that provides scientifically valid and socially legitimate information about an intervention or any of its components, so that the various stakeholders involved—who may have different perspectives—are able to take a position on the intervention and form a judgment that can be translated into action. (Brousselle, Champagne, Contandriopoulos, & Hartz, 2009); Contandriopoulos, Champagne, Denis, & Avargues, 2000) There is not a single evaluation but a variety of evaluations that can vary across several dimensions. First, it is necessary to distinguish evaluations based on their timing, thereby serving different purposes (before, during, or after the action). Second, it is important to differentiate evaluations based on the nature of the evaluation framework: scientific evaluations (or evaluative research) aim to generate new knowledge using a scientific approach, while field evaluations aim to support and optimize the intervention through simpler methodologies that can be implemented by the stakeholders. Based on these two dimensions (timing and evaluation approach), nine main evaluations (including five field evaluations) were identified to assess CPS interventions: - Upstream: 1/ modeling is a schematic representation of the action, and theoretical evaluation is a conceptual analysis used to assess the quality and foundations of this modeling; - during the development phase: 2/ pre-test studies (qualitative) assess the suitability of the materials; 3/ experimental effectiveness evaluations demonstrate the effects; 4/ process evaluations examine the mechanisms of the intervention; - during the deployment phase: 5/ post-test studies focus on beneficiary feedback, 6/ implementation evaluations describe the goods and services produced (in relation to operational objectives), 7/ process evaluations examine the processes and factors associated with the implementation of the intervention, 8/ outcome evaluations using indicator tracking allow for the objective assessment of changes in determinants, health problems, and health status (in relation to specific health objectives), 9/ time series analyses demonstrate that these changes are indeed caused by the CPS intervention.